CRAK vs. PWER
CRAK (VanEck Oil Refiners ETF) and PWER (Macquarie Energy Transition ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CRAK is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Oil Refiners Index, while PWER is a Alternative Energy Equities fund actively managed by Macquarie. CRAK is passively managed, while PWER is actively managed. Over the past year, CRAK returned 62.84% vs 49.15% for PWER. Their 0.56 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. CRAK charges 0.62%/yr vs 0.80%/yr for PWER.
Performance
CRAK vs. PWER - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRAK achieves a 42.27% return, which is significantly higher than PWER's 23.61% return.
CRAK
- 1D
- -1.98%
- 1M
- 10.07%
- 6M
- 22.50%
- YTD
- 42.27%
- 1Y
- 62.84%
- 3Y*
- 21.72%
- 5Y*
- 17.98%
- 10Y*
- 14.07%
- ALL TIME*
- 12.45%
PWER
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 5.97%
- 6M
- 9.15%
- YTD
- 23.61%
- 1Y
- 49.15%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 23.57%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $22.43M | $19.62M | $10.06M | |
| $32.43K | $20.22K | $31.27K |
CRAK vs. PWER - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF | 42.27% | 39.11% | -15.05% | 0.58% |
PWER Macquarie Energy Transition ETF | 23.61% | 35.28% | -3.50% | 9.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRAK and PWER is 0.42, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.42 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 29, 2023 | 0.56 |
The correlation between CRAK and PWER shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.56 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
CRAK vs. PWER - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CRAK
PWER
Energy
Industrials
Basic Materials
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Energy
CRAK
PWER
Industrials
CRAK
PWER
Basic Materials
CRAK
PWER
Communication Services
CRAK
-
PWER
-
Consumer Cyclical
CRAK
-
PWER
-
Consumer Defensive
CRAK
-
PWER
-
Financial Services
CRAK
-
PWER
-
Healthcare
CRAK
-
PWER
-
Real Estate
CRAK
-
PWER
-
Technology
CRAK
-
PWER
Utilities
CRAK
-
PWER
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CRAK vs. PWER — Risk / Return Rank
CRAK
PWER
CRAK vs. PWER - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK) and Macquarie Energy Transition ETF (PWER). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| CRAK | PWER | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.84 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.39 | +0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.65 | 3.61 | +1.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.28 | 10.16 | +5.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CRAK vs. PWER - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRAK drawdown since its inception was -58.80%, which is greater than PWER's maximum drawdown of -29.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRAK and PWER.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRAK | PWER | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.80% | -29.68% | -29.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.59% | -13.70% | +0.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.61% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.61% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -58.80% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.41% | -6.83% | +2.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.38% | -6.47% | -5.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.13% | 4.85% | -0.72% |
Volatility
CRAK vs. PWER - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK) has a higher volatility of 7.42% compared to Macquarie Energy Transition ETF (PWER) at 4.93%. This indicates that CRAK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PWER based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRAK | PWER | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.42% | 4.93% | +2.49% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.09% | 16.66% | -0.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.19% | 21.60% | -1.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.78% | 23.53% | -2.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.26% | 23.53% | -1.27% |
CRAK vs. PWER - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRAK has a 0.62% expense ratio, which is lower than PWER's 0.80% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRAK vs. PWER - Dividend Comparison
CRAK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, more than PWER's 0.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CRAK VanEck Oil Refiners ETF | 1.42% | 2.02% | 5.60% | 3.65% | 3.08% | 2.40% | 2.64% | 1.49% | 2.42% | 1.66% | 3.42% | 0.47% |
PWER Macquarie Energy Transition ETF | 0.77% | 1.37% | 1.05% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CRAK and PWER have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CRAK has higher volatility (7.42%) compared to PWER (4.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRAK dropped -58.80% vs PWER's -29.68%.
On 1-year performance, CRAK leads with 62.84% vs 49.15% for PWER. On fees, CRAK is cheaper at 0.62% per year. On volatility, PWER has been the lower-risk option at 4.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CRAK has performed better with a 62.84% return vs 49.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CRAK is cheaper with a 0.62% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for PWER.
CRAK has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.77% for PWER.
CRAK is categorized as Energy Equities, while PWER is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Macquarie. Their fees differ too: 0.62% for CRAK and 0.80% for PWER.
CRAK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.13 vs 2.29), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for CRAK and PWER
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer